Developer says ZBA conditions make project at historic site a financial loser.

Vicki-Ann Downing

The decision Tuesday by the Zoning Board of Appeals to issue a comprehensive permit, with conditions, to the developers of the old Ames shovel factory is only the beginning of another contentious process.

“There will either be an appeal and we’ll win, or there will be some form of demolition so we can build something that works,” said Bob Engler, a consultant for the developers, George and Robert Turner.

The Turners are expected to appeal the zoning board decision to the state Housing Appeals Committee within the next 20 days, as allowed under the state’s Chapter 40B affordable housing law.

The Turners proposed 160 apartments, 17 condominiums, 15,000 square feet of office space and 373 parking spaces on an 8-acre site at Main and Oliver streets where the world-famous shovel factory was founded in 1803.

In making its decision on Tuesday, the Zoning Board of Appeals came down heavily on the side of history, declaring the Turner project “will adversely and irrevocably affect the historical significance” of the factory site and the North Easton Historic District, while acknowledging the town’s need for affordable housing.

In granting the permit with conditions, the zoning board said the Turners cannot add fourth floors to two buildings, cannot split the Long Shop in half by adding a passageway, and cannot demolish the Antrim Opening Shop.

The board stopped short of saying how many apartments and condominiums the Turners could build. By leaving the number open, the board said the developers could reconfigure layouts to add more housing units into the floor plan.

But Robert Turner said the conditions set by the board make the project not viable economically.

“We can only live with our own proposal, give or take a couple of units,” said Turner. “We can’t redesign it. We’ve made substantial compromises, in our opinion. There’s just so much we can do in order to make the project work economically.”

By removing the possibility of a fourth floor on two buildings, the board effectively eliminated 26 housing units, Turner said.

He implied the decision would be appealed as a result, adding, “No hard feelings.”

Only a month ago, the National Trust for Historic Preservation named the shovel factory site one of the 11 most endangered historic resources in the United States.

The zoning board said it carefully considered comments from the Easton Historical Commission and the Friends of the Ames Shovel Works in making its decision, which followed 13 hearing dates over the course of 11 months .

“I appreciate the fact that the board recognized the unique, nationally historic aspects of the site, the devastating effects of the proposal, and the fact that alternatives do exist,” said Historical Commission member Gregory Galer.

David Ames, president of the Friends of the Ames Shovel Works, said the zoning board review had been “a careful process.”

“I think, myself, that the board is coming down on the right side,” said Ames. “I won’t say I’m 100 percent behind every aspect of their decision, but a lot of thought was given” to the Friends’ comments.

His brother, Fred Ames, said he hoped the Turners would follow the zoning board’s recommendation to work with the Friends and the Historical Commission in redesigning plans.

“We look forward to actually having a process of negotiation with the Turner brothers, which up to this point they have avoided,” Fred Ames said. “They have never entered seriously into negotiations.”

The zoning board voted 3-1 to grant the permit, with Chairman Water Mirrione, Tom Pursley and Jack Tupper in favor. Scott Erlich was opposed because he said the board considered the historical impact too much.

“I’m not crazy about this project,” said Erlich. “But in the end, it comes down to aesthetic and architectural issues against the need for affordable housing. I think the need for housing wins out.”

In addition to the appeal process, the Turner’s project still needs to undergo an environmental and historical review under the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act.